HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-10 City Council Agenda Packet
1 03/10/08
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. A binder containing supporting materials is available in the Council
Chambers on the Friday preceding the meeting.
Special Meeting
Council Chambers
March 10, 2008
6:30 PM
ROLL CALL
CLOSED SESSION
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Agency Negotiator: City Manager and his designees pursuant to
Merit Rules and Regulations (Frank Benest,
Russ Carlsen, Darrell Murray, Sandra Blanch,
Lalo Perez, Nick Marinaro)
Employee Organization: Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association
Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a)
STUDY SESSION
2. The City’s Response to the Next Gen Challenge
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
3. Selection of Candidates for Interviews for the Architectural Review
Board
REPORT
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the
right to limit the duration or Oral Communications.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
January 7, 2008
January 14, 2008
03/10/08 2
CONSENT CALENDAR
Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members.
4. 2nd Reading Adoption of an Ordinance Rezoning Approximately
1.81 Acres of Caltrans-Owned Land, Located at the Southwest
Corner of Caltrans Right-of-Way at San Antonio Avenue and
U.S. 101 (Bayshore Freeway) North of the Terminus of
Transport Road, from Public Facilities District (PF) to General
Manufacturing District (GM) for 1001 San Antonio Avenue
(Ciardella’s) (passed on 2/11/08 on an 8-0 Barton not participating)
5. 2nd Reading Adoption of Ordinance Approving and Adopting a Park
Improvement Plan for Alexander Peers Park (passed on 2/19/08 on a 9-0)
6. 2nd Reading Adoption of Ordinance Amending Section 18.08.040
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the Zoning Map) to Change the
Classification of Property at 449 -451 Addison Avenue,
Two-Family Residential District (R-2) to PC Planned Community
(passed on 2/19/08 on a 9-0)
7. Adoption of a Resolution of Intent to Establish Underground Utility
District No. 45 (Palo Alto Avenue, Alma Street, High Street, Lytton
Avenue and Cambridge Avenue) by Amending Section 12.16.020 of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code
CMR:157:08 ATTACHMENT
8. Appointment of 2008 Emergency Standby Council Members
CMR: 154:08
9. Approval of Blanket Purchase Order with Olin Chlor Alkalai Products in
an Amount Not to Exceed $488,749 for the Purchase of Bulk Sodium
Hypochlorite for the Water Quality Control Plant and Approval of Two
One Year Extensions
CMR:148:08 ATTACHMENT
10. Approval of Contract with Alfatech Cambridge Group in the Total
Amount of $569,280 for Construction Management Services for the
Civic Center Infrastructure Improvements – Capital Improvement
Program Project PF-01002
CMR: 160:08 ATTACHMENT
11. Adoption of a Resolution Approving Amendment No. 1 to the Long-
Term Power Purchase Agreement with Ameresco Keller Canyon, L.L.C.
for the Purchase of Electricity Generated by Landfill Gas for a Term of
03/10/08 3
20 Years and an Amount Not to Exceed $21.7 Million
CMR: 150:08 ATTACHMENT
12. Adoption of Two Resolutions Supporting the City’s Application for
Funding from the Urban Forestry Grant Program Entitled “an Urban
Forest for Every City,” as Provided Through Propositions 40 and 84, for
(1) an Urban Forestry Management Plan Grant and (2) an Urban
Forestry Inventory Grant
CMR:155:08 ATTACHMENT
13. Approval of the Expenditure of $290,000 in Capital Improvement
Program Funds Through a Contract with the Palo Alto Art Center
Foundation to Develop and Complete the Planning and Design Phase
for the Renovation and Capital Improvements to the Palo Alto Art
Center Capital Improvement Project PF-07000 (Art Center Electrical
and Mechanical Upgrades)
CMR:107:08 ATTACHMENT
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS
HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the
public discussion to make their remarks and put up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members
of the public have spoken.
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS: Public comments or testimony on agenda items other than Oral Communications shall be
limited to a maximum of five minutes per speaker unless additional time is granted by the presiding officer. The
presiding officer may reduce the allowed time to less than five minutes if necessary to accommodate a larger number of speakers.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARINGS
14. Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 18.14 (“Below Market
Rate Housing Program”) to Title 18 (“Zoning”) of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code
CMR:161:08 ATTACHMENT
15. Approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Site and Design and
Record of Land Use Action to Allow (1) Architectural and Landscape
Architectural Changes to Two Open Space (OS) District Homes at 3220
and 3230 Alexis Drive, (2) Screening Vegetation on Adjacent Foothills
Park Land, and (3) Expansion of the Project Site to Include an
Adjacent, Vacant OS Parcel at 3208 Alexis Drive to be Graded,
Landscaped and Used for Driveway Access, a Spa and a Perimeter
Pathway
CMR:156:08 ATTACHMENT
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
03/10/08 4
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
COUNCIL MATTERS
COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s).
CLOSED SESSION
This item may occur during the recess or after the Regular Meeting.
Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker.
ADJOURNMENT
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services, or programs or who
would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact
650-329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
CMR: 157:08 Page 1 of 3
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 157:08
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ESTABLISH
UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 45 (PALO ALTO AVENUE,
ALMA STREET, HIGH STREET, LYTTON AVENUE AND CAMBRIDGE
AVENUE) BY AMENDING SECTION 12.16.020 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution of Intent to establish Underground
Utility District No. 45 (UUD 45) by amending Section 12.16.02, of Chapter 12.16 of Title 12; of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
BACKGROUND
The Electric Utility’s undergrounding project areas are selected and recommended to AT&T and
Comcast, the two other utilities participating in undergrounding projects, based on the age and
maintainability of the existing overhead electric system. AT&T and Comcast determine whether
the recommended areas meet their criteria for undergrounding based on guidelines established by
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The attached exhibits “B” and “C” show
the boundaries of UUD 45. The area now proposed as UUD 45 meets the City and CPUC
guidelines for undergrounding overhead utility lines. The attached exhibit “D” provides
additional background and history on undergrounding of electric utilities.
DISCUSSION
UUD 45 will result in the removal of 41 poles and provide underground service to 45 properties,
mostly commercial, of which a small percentage are residential properties. Completion of UUD
45 will eliminate overhead distribution lines in an area bordered by existing underground
districts and enhance reliability of the electric distribution system while improving aesthetics.
7
CMR: 157:08 Page 2 of 3
Once the underground district is created, the Utilities Department will design and obtain bids for
the installation of the underground substructure required prior to placing the electric, telephone,
cable TV (CATV), fiber, street light and City communication facilities underground. After the
new underground systems (cable, transformers, switches, etc.) have been installed, the property
owners will connect to the new underground system, utilizing their own contractors. City crews
will then remove the overhead power lines, and telephone crews will complete the project by
removing the remaining telephone and CATV overhead facilities and the poles.
City staff is currently in discussion with AT&T concerning the allocation of costs and
responsibilities for joint trench applications. As both parties agree that joint participation on
projects is mutually beneficial, these discussions should not have an impact on the timeline of the
project. The discussions are on-going, but staff does not foresee a significant change in cost
allocation for projects with joint trench participation from AT&T.
On December 17, 2007, a letter was sent to the property owners in the proposed district
introducing the project and inviting them to a meeting. During the January 31, 2008, meeting
(attended by 6 property owners), staff explained the details of the project and answered questions
from the property owners. A questionnaire, which was included with the letter, was used to
determine the level of support for the project. Staff has received completed questionnaires from
23 property owners, 19 (77%) of whom are in favor of the project, 3 (20%) of whom are not in
favor of the project, and 1 (3%) having no preference.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Funds for UUD 45 are included in the FY 2008-09 and 2009-10 Utilities Department Electric
Capital Improvement Program budget. The only cost to the property owners will be that of
replacing the overhead service drops to their buildings with underground service. It is estimated
that the average cost per property owner will be approximately $11,000. Property owners will be
offered the option of financing their service conversions under Section 12.16.091 of Palo Alto
Municipal Code which provides for City loans to property owners to fund the service
conversions. Property owners repay the loan and administrative costs, which are added to their
property tax bills, over a ten-year period, at an interest rate approved by the Council.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The resolution of intent does not represent any change to existing City policy and is consistent
with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan to invest in utility infrastructure to deliver
reliable service.
TIMELINE
The first step in the establishment of the district is the Council’s adoption of a Resolution of
Intent to establish Underground Utility District No. 45. The Resolution defines the district
boundaries and sets a time and place for a public hearing on the matter. The public hearing has
been tentatively scheduled for the City Council meeting on May 5, 2008. At the public hearing,
the property owners will have an opportunity to comment on the project. The adoption of the
Resolution of Intent will also serve as a formal action that is required by AT&T and Comcast
prior to starting engineering design.
CMR: 157:08 Page 3 of 3
Action Date
1. Resolution of Intent to establish Underground District
No. 45
March 10, 2008*
2. Public Hearing May 5, 2008*
3. Award of construction contract and Joint Construction
Agreement with AT&T/Comcast
November 2008*
4. Substructure (conduits, vaults, etc.) installation by
Contractor
January 2009 through April
2009
5. Installation of underground facilities (cable, switches,
etc.)
May 2009 through July 2009
6. Resolution determining properties electing to pay service
conversion cost over a period of 10 years
March 2009*
7. Service conversion work by property owners July 2009 through September
2009
8. Pole removal and project completion October 2009 through January
2010
* Denotes Council Action
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15302(d) (conversion of
overhead electric utility distribution system facilities to underground).
ATTACHMENTS
A: Resolution
B: Underground Utility District No. 45 Boundary Map – Palo Alto Avenue, Alma Street, High
Street and Lytton Avenue area
C: Underground Utility District No. 45 Boundary Map – Cambridge Avenue area
D: Background and History on Underground of Electric Utilities
PREPARED BY: JAMES BUJTOR
Sr. Electric Project Engineer
DEPARTMENT HEAD: ______________________________
VALERIE FONG
Director of Utilities
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ______________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:154:08 Page 1 of 2
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 154:08
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF 2008 EMERGENCY STANDBY COUNCIL
MEMBERS
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the selection of the 2008 Emergency Standby
Council as follows:
• Bern Beecham
• Judy Kleinberg
• Dena Mosser
• Gary Fazzino
• Victor Ojakian
• Emily Renzel
• Lanie Wheeler
BACKGROUND
The Charter of the City of Palo Alto provides that “the Council may by ordinance or resolution,
provide for the preservation and continuation of government in the event of disaster which
renders unavailable a majority of the Council.” On August 7, 2006, the City Council adopted
amendments to Section 2.12.090 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding the selection
procedure for the City’s Emergency Standby Council. The adopted policy states that the Council
shall consider the following criteria for appointments to the Emergency Standby Council:
residency in the City of Palo Alto, availability, interest in serving and a lack of conflicts of
interest.
DISCUSSION
On April 10, 2007, the Council approved the selection of the 2007 Emergency Standby Council.
Due to the recent departure of four members from the Council, staff first solicited interest from
these members in serving. Three of these members expressed an interest. The other four
recommended appointees served on the 2007 Standby Council and continue to have availability
and an interest in serving. These recommendations ensure that the Standby Council membership
remain at seven members.
CMR:154:08 Page 2 of 2
RESOURCE IMPACT
There are no resource impacts associated with this recommendation. Funding for training of the
Emergency Standby Council is incorporated in the Office of Emergency Services’ budget.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The selection of the Emergency Standby Council is consistent with existing City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This is not a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA).
PREPARED BY: ___________________________________
Kelly Morariu
Assistant to the City Manager
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
CMR:148:08 Page 1 of 2
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR:148:08
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER WITH OLIN CHLOR
ALKALAI PRODUCTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $488,749
FOR THE PURCHASE OF BULK SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE FOR THE
WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT AND APPROVAL OF TWO ONE
YEAR EXTENSIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a blanket purchase
order with Olin Chlor Alkalai Products for the remainder of FY 07-08 for an amount not
to exceed $97,750, and for FY 08-09 in an amount not to exceed $390,999; and
2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute two one year
extensions to the blanket purchase order for FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 in an amount
not to exceed $390,999 per year, plus the Department of Labor producer price index for
chlorine.
DISCUSSION
The sodium hypochlorite purchased under this order will protect the public health by providing
disinfection of the Water Quality Control Plant effluent before discharge to San Francisco Bay.
A Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the purchase of 12.5% bulk sodium hypochlorite was issued
in December 2007. The solicitation was sent to six vendors and four responses were received.
The low bidder quoted a unit price of $0.735 per gallon of sodium hypochlorite based on an
estimated annual quantity of 484,000 gallons. The estimated quantity was specified for the
purpose of determining the lowest responsible bidder, and no guarantee is implied that the exact
amount will be purchased. The RFQ fixes the price through June 2009 and establishes a price
increase for each of the two optional 12-month extension periods. The extension periods will be
on a fiscal year basis; the price increase will be based on the U.S. Department of Labor producer
price index for chlorine. The proposed blanket purchase order requires Council approval
because the expenditures will likely exceed $250,000 per fiscal year.
The bid summary is provided in Attachment A. The Certification of Nondiscrimination is
Attachment B.
CMR:148:08 Page 2 of 2
RESOURCE IMPACT
Funds have been budgeted for these operational costs in the FY 2007-08 through FY 2010-11
Wastewater Treatment budgets.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Authorization of this blanket purchase order does not represent a change to existing policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15301 of the CEQA guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Bid Summary
Attachment B: Certification of Nondiscrimination
PREPARED BY: ____________________________
RICHARD WETZEL
Manager, Water Quality Control
DEPARTMENT HEAD _____________________________
GLENN ROBERTS
Director of Public Works
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: _____________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:160:08 Page 1 of 4
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR:160:08
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH ALFATECH CAMBRIDGE GROUP
IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $569,280 FOR CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE CIVIC CENTER
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS – CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM PROJECT PF-01002
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract
with Alfatech Cambridge Group in the amount of $517,280 for Construction
Management Services for the Civic Center Infrastructure Improvements Project – Capital
Improvement Program Project PF-01002;
2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change
orders to the contract with Alfatech Cambridge Group for related, additional but
unforeseen work which may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not
exceed $52,000; and
3. Authorize the future retention of Alfatech Cambridge Group for phases 2 and 3 of the
Civic Center project, subject to Council approval of the additional compensation amount
and satisfactory performance in Phase 1.
BACKGROUND
The Civic Center was built in 1969. It houses City offices, the police station, and three levels of
parking. Major electrical and mechanical systems are approaching the end of their useful lives
and are in need of replacement in order to maintain uninterrupted services. As part of the on-
going capital infrastructure maintenance program, a complete building system study of the Civic
Center was completed in fiscal year 2002-03. An elevator upgrade was completed in 2005.
Design services were awarded in 2005 (CMR:282:05) for the remainder of the work which
includes electrical system upgrades, generator replacement, mechanical system upgrades, and
exterior sealing and painting. Mechanical and electrical systems serving the police wing are
excluded from the project at this time.
Due to the cost of the project, estimated at $12M, construction of this remaining work has been
broken into 3 phases and will be bid in three stages. Work in Phase 1, to which this contract
applies, will include replacement of the main building generator, boiler, and refurbishment or
replacement of major garage and building mechanical and electrical systems. This phase is
CMR:160:08 Page 2 of 4
estimated at $6M. Future phases will upgrade the balance of the mechanical systems; electrical
systems, including transformers, panels, etc.; and exterior painting and sealing. Future phases
are expected to be completed over the next four to five years. Timing of specific items may shift
due to condition assessment and availability of funding.
DISCUSSION
Renovation of the Civic Center’s mechanical and electrical systems requires specific technical
experience and knowledge of mechanical and electrical systems; coordination of multiple prime
contract management; and 24 hour/7 days per week oversight of the work. The limited project
staffing available in-house will not allow for the required management of a project of this size
and complexity. Given the need to keep the facility open during the construction phase, the
logistics of this project will require a high degree of off- hours work and coordination with each
of the prime contractors and City departments. Mechanical and electrical systems serving the
police wing are excluded from the project at this time. If and when the City decides to lease the
police wing, these upgrades would be discussed as part of any lease negotiations.
Summary of Solicitation Process
Proposal Description/Number Construction Management Services for Civic Center
Infrastructure Improvements RFP#124310
Proposed Length of Project 12 months
Number of Proposals Mailed 6
Total Days to Respond to Proposal 45 days
Pre-proposal Meeting Date October 16, 2007
Number of Company Attendees at Pre-
proposal Meeting
14 firms
Number of Proposals Received: 8
Company Name Location (City, State) Selected for oral interview?
1. 4Leaf, Inc. Pleasanton, CA No
2. Alfa Tech Cambridge Group, Inc. Palo Alto, CA Yes
3. Consolidated CM Oakland, CA Yes
4. Cooper Pugeda Management, Inc. San Francisco, CA No
5. Kitchell CEM San Jose, CA Yes
6. Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc. San Jose, CA No
7. Swinerton Mgmt. and Consulting San Francisco, CA Yes
8. Zahn Group San Francisco, CA No
Range of Proposal Amounts Submitted $437,368 to $829,760
A Request for Proposal (RFP) for construction management services for the Civic Center
Infrastructure Improvements was posted on the City website and sent to six consulting firms on
September 20, 2007. Firms were given 45 days to respond to the request. A pre-proposal
meeting was held on October 16, 2007; fourteen firms attended the meeting. A total of eight
firms submitted proposals. Proposals costs ranged from $437,368 to 829,760.
An evaluation committee consisting of staff from the Public Works Engineering and Facilities
Management Divisions reviewed all proposals and four firms were invited to participate in oral
interviews on December 5, 2007. The committee carefully reviewed each firm’s qualifications
and submittals in response to the criteria identified in the RFP.
CMR:160:08 Page 3 of 4
The proposals were judged by the following principle criteria:
• quality and effectiveness of proposed solutions,
• qualifications and experience of the staff to be assigned to the project, including
knowledge of electrical and mechanical systems and multiple prime delivery method,
• proposal quality and completeness,
• perceived response time and ability to perform the work, and
• proposal cost.
Alfatech Cambridge Group (ATCG) was selected because it demonstrated superior knowledge of
construction management, has extensive experience with infrastructure projects of this type, and
experience with coordination of multiple prime contractors. In addition to being highly
technically qualified and experienced, ATCG representatives demonstrated knowledge of the
importance of the off-hours work and minimal disruption to City operations as key to
successfully completing this project.
The RFP provided that the selected consultant could be awarded all phase of construction
management if their work was found to be satisfactory.
The work that Alfatech Cambridge Group will manage under this contract is Phase 1.
Construction of the next two phases will be accomplished in subsequent fiscal years for which
Alfatech may also be retained. Any contract amendment for future phases will be brought back
to Council for approval.
Following is the current project schedule (for Phase 1 only):
March 2008 Start of pre-construction activities
July 2008 Award of construction contracts
August 2008 Construction begins
June 2009 Construction ends
RESOURCE IMPACT
Funds for this contract are available in Capital Improvement Program Project PF-01002, Civic
Center Infrastructure Improvements.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This recommendation does not represent any change in existing City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under
Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Contract (including Scope of Services and Certificate of Non-Discrimination)
CMR:160:08 Page 4 of 4
PREPARED BY: _______________________________________
KAREN SMITH
Manager of Facilities Maintenance and Projects
DEPARTMENT HEAD: _______________________________________
GLENN ROBERTS
Director of Public Works
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: _______________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:150:08 Page 1 of 5
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR:150:08
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT NO.
1 TO THE LONG-TERM POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT
WITH AMERESCO KELLER CANYON, L.L.C. FOR THE
PURCHASE OF ELECTRICITY GENERATED BY LANDFILL GAS
FOR A TERM OF 20 YEARS AND AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$21.7 MILLION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the
Long-Term Power Purchase Agreement with Ameresco Keller Canyon, LLC. for a 50% share of
the 3.0 to 4.3 megawatt (MW) (gross) capacity of the Keller Canyon landfill generating facility
located in Pittsburg, California.
• The amended contract price is $62.50/MWh in year 1, escalating at 1.5% per year,
increased from the original $59.00/MWh in year 1, also escalating at 1.5% per year.
• The amended total contract amount is $21.7 million, reduced from the original $22.8
million due to a reduction in generation capacity.
• The term of the agreement is 20 years, unchanged from the original agreement.
• The resolution authorizes the City Manager to sign the amendment to the agreement on
behalf of the City.
11
CMR:150:08 Page 2 of 5
BACKGROUND
On March 5, 2007 the City Council approved revised Long-Term Electric Acquisition Plan
(“LEAP”) Guidelines (CMR:318:07), which direct staff to pursue a target level of new
renewable purchases of 20% of the expected portfolio load by 2008 and increasing to a 30%
target level by 2012 and 33% by 2015, while ensuring that the retail rate impact does not exceed
0.5 ¢/kWh on average. To date, Council has approved five long-term renewable energy
contracts. Three of these contracts are operating (PPM High Winds, PPM Shiloh I Wind, and
Ameresco Santa Cruz Landfill) and account for 13.5% of supply, one is under construction
(Ameresco Half Moon Bay Landfill), which will account for 4% of supply, and one is preparing
to initiate construction (Ameresco Keller Canyon) which will provide another 1% of supply.
Staff is currently negotiating with additional parties to meet the targets for 2008 and beyond.
On August 5, 2005, the City entered into a power purchase agreement with Ameresco Keller
Canyon, L.L.C. Energy, Inc. (“Ameresco”) to provide renewable power generated by the
proposed Keller Canyon Landfill electric generating facility to be located in Pittsburg, California
(CMR:350:05, Resolution #8552). The contract amount was $22.8 million over the 20-year term
of the agreement, with a planned installed gross capacity of 3.0 to 4.3 MW, and a net capacity at
the point of interconnection between 2.8 MW and 4.1 MW. Alameda Power & Telecom (AP&T)
is purchasing 50% of the output from the proposed plant and the City is purchasing the other
50%.
On August 22, 2007, Ameresco notified the City and AP&T that the initial capacity of the plant
will be 3.808 MW (gross nameplate). On December 4, 2007, Ameresco notified the City and
AP&T that due to a series of significant unanticipated cost overruns incurred by the project to
comply with local building codes, fire protection, habitat protection and air quality permitting
requirements, Ameresco is now unable to obtain financing for the project with the pricing in the
original agreement. Ameresco requested a 6% contract price increase in order to be able to move
forward with construction.
Ameresco has been a diligent and cooperative supplier to date, and has earned a stellar reputation
in the industry. Ameresco was named the 2007 Industry Partner of the Year by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program.
DISCUSSION
Staff recommends that Council adopt a Resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the Long-
Term Power Purchase Agreement with Ameresco Keller Canyon, LLC. for a 50% share of the
3.0-4.3 MW (gross) capacity of the Keller Canyon landfill generating facility located in
Pittsburg, California. The term of the agreement is 20 years, unchanged from the original
agreement. The new total contract amount is $21.7 million in spite of the increased capital costs,
due to the facility’s slightly lower generation capacity.
The Ameresco Keller Canyon project has incurred additional project capital costs of over $2.5
million dollars. Staff has reviewed documentation of the various additional expenses, and has
verified that costs have been incurred by the project in order to comply with local building codes,
CMR:150:08 Page 3 of 5
fire prevention, habitat protection, and air permitting requirements, that were not anticipated by
Ameresco or included in the economic modeling of the project. Staff believes that Ameresco has
worked in good faith to contain the construction costs while not adversely impacting the quality
of the project, and that the requested price increase of 6% is in the best interests of the City.
Ameresco is shouldering a substantial portion of the additional costs, and the price even after the
increase is substantially lower than the replacement costs. AP&T staff are requesting approval
from the Alameda City Council in parallel with this request.
The City could instead reject the price increase request, in which case the City would need to
procure an equivalent amount of renewable electricity at a substantially higher price, and AP&T
would then hold the right of first refusal to purchase Palo Alto’s share of the output at the
proposed price.
A copy of the original contract is provided as Attachment C for Council and available to the
public on file with the City Clerk. The key terms of the contract, as amended, are as follows:
• Term: 20 years, with deliveries commencing when construction is completed and the
facility is operational. The Keller Canyon facility is expected to be operational by
November 2008.
• Quantity: 50% of the output from the facility. Keller Canyon will have a gross capacity of
3.808 MW, (2.895 MW net), with expected annual generation of 22,800 to 30,000 MWh
(11,400–15,000 MWh to Palo Alto, or approximately one percent of the City’s annual
load). The contract includes a right to purchase the output from additions to the facility
at a price determined at the time that additions are proposed, and the option for Palo Alto
and AP&T to each assign its share of the contract to the other. Any such amendments
would be subject to Council approval.
• Product: Electric generation from landfill gas (LFG) operates around the clock, except for
scheduled and unplanned equipment outages. NCPA will serve as scheduling coordinator
for the facility.
• Price: $62.50/MWh in the first year, escalating at 1.5% per year, for a total contract
amount of $21,700,000, based on estimated generation. The price in year 20 is
$82.93/MWh.
• Credit: Ameresco, Inc. is a small company relative to the large investment-grade energy
companies and does not have a credit rating from Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s.
Energy deliveries are tied to a specific generator and specific location, as opposed to
market contracts whose deliveries are often backed by financial strength or collateral
rather than a physical asset. The contract includes minimum equipment availability
requirements, and provisions to allow Palo Alto or Alameda to take over operations of
the facility should Ameresco stop operating the facility. Council waived the investment-
grade credit rating requirement for this vendor, otherwise applicable to electric power
contracts.
CMR:150:08 Page 4 of 5
• Off-Ramps: Either party may terminate the contract if the other party does not meet its
obligations under the contract, which include performance, payment, and meeting
permitting, construction, and operation date milestones. The contract includes penalty
payments for late completion of the project. Should the contract be terminated due to
default, any damages, such as landfill gas energy replacement cost, that may be incurred
are only due to the non-defaulting party. Venue for dispute resolution is the County of
San Francisco instead of Santa Clara County due to the joint purchase with AP&T.
RESOURCE IMPACT
The estimated annual cost is $696,000 in the first year, rising to $1,112,000 in year 20. The
average impact of the proposed change in contract price is approximately $48,000 per year, with
a total cost impact of $960,000 over 20 years. These costs have been factored into long-term
budget projections, and will be included in future budget year proposals. Annual costs may
fluctuate slightly due to the as-delivered nature of a generator-specific purchase, but is expected
to be within 5% of the estimated cost.
The 20-year price schedule is $62.50/MWh escalating at 1.5% per year, which is roughly
$8.00/MWh below the current projected prices for base load electricity. This difference means
there is a slightly favorable retail rate impact relative to market prices of about -0.1¢/kWh. The
contract facilitates meeting the renewable energy supply procurement targets within the ½¢/kWh
limit approved by Council.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Renewable energy supplies are required to meet the targets established by Council in LEAP
Guideline #6 (Renewable Energy Supply). The proposed renewable energy supply contract is a
key element of the LEAP Implementation Plan (CMR:169:06) and supports the Council-
approved Utilities Strategic Plan (CMR 432:02). The contract also supports the City’s
Sustainability Policy Statement, adopted June 18, 2007 (CMR:260:07), the Green Government
Pledge, adopted July 19, 1999 (CMR 284:99), the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan
(CMR:435:07), and elements of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically:
1. GOAL N-9: A clean, efficient, competitively-priced energy supply that makes use of
cost-effective renewable resources, and Policies
2. POLICY N-44: Maintain Palo Alto’s long-term supply of electricity and natural gas
while addressing environmental and economic concerns.
3. POLICY N-48: Encourage the appropriate use of alternative energy technologies.
CMR:150:08 Page 5 of 5
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Execution of the Amendment does not constitute a project pursuant to Sec.21065 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), thus no environmental assessment is required.
Ameresco Keller Canyon, L.L.C. assumes responsibility for future CEQA compliance associated
with development, finance, construction and operation of the facility.
ATTACHMENTS
A: Resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to a contract with Ameresco Keller Canyon, L.L.C.
to purchase electricity generated by landfill gas from the Keller Canyon Landfill generating
facility.
B: Amendment No. 1 to Long-term power purchase agreement (landfill gas electric power)
made between the City of Palo Alto, as Purchaser and Ameresco Keller Canyon, L.L.C.
C: Long-term power purchase agreement (landfill gas electric power) made between the City of
Palo Alto, as Purchaser and Ameresco Keller Canyon, L.L.C. Attachment C is included as an
attachment in Council member packets and available for review by the public in the City
Clerk’s Office.
PREPARED BY: ______________________________
KARL E. KNAPP
Senior Resource Planner
DEPARTMENT HEAD: ______________________________
VALERIE O. FONG
Director of Utilities
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ______________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:155:08 Page 1 of 2
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 155:08
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF TWO RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING THE CITY’S
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE URBAN FORESTRY GRANT PROGRAM
ENTITLED “AN URBAN FOREST FOR EVERY CITY,” AS PROVIDED THROUGH
PROPOSITIONS 40 AND 84, FOR (1) AN URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN
GRANT AND (2) AN URBAN FORESTRY INVENTORY GRANT
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the two attached resolutions (Attachments A and
B) in support of the City’s applications for the Cal Fire Urban Forestry grant program.
BACKGROUND
On April 17, 2006 (Earth Day), the City Council adopted recommendations from a Colleagues’
Memo related to several environmental initiatives. One of these initiatives was the update of
Palo Alto’s Street Tree Management Plan. The Council directed staff to work with CANOPY
and other interested citizens and to return to Council in Spring 2007 with a draft update to the
Street Tree Management Plan. In September 2006, a task force was formed to begin work on the
update to the Street Tree Management Plan. The task force includes staff from Public Works,
Administrative Services, Utilities, Parks, Open Space, Planning, the City Manager’s Office and
representatives from CANOPY. At the outset, the team identified the need to broaden the scope
of the Street Tree Management Plan to encompass all elements of the City’s urban forest.
Currently, the City has numerous documents that address different elements of the urban forest,
including the Comprehensive Plan and the Tree Technical Manual. However, there is no single
document that identifies the overall goals and management strategies for the urban forest. The
goal of the working group has thus become the creation of a comprehensive document that
addresses the management, protection and enhancement of the City’s urban forest resources.
This document will identify the issues facing Palo Alto’s urban forest and will provide concrete
actions for addressing these issues.
DISCUSSION
In support of this work effort, staff applied for two State grants from the California Department
of Forestry (Cal Fire), totaling $180,000. The first grant would fund the development of the
Urban Forest Master Plan and community engagement process. The other grant would fund an
CMR:155:08 Page 2 of 2
update to the City’s public tree inventory along with enhancements to the City’s GIS software to
enable effective integration of two systems. The City received notification in late January that
Cal Fire selected both grant applications for funding. As part of the grant process, the City must
submit a resolution adopted by the City Council supporting both applications in order to finalize
funding (Attachments A and B).
RESOURCE IMPACT
The receipt of these grant funds ($180,000) will supplement the existing staff and General Fund
resources dedicated to these efforts and will greatly enhance the project outcomes. Before the
initial submittal of the applications, staff from Administrative Services reviewed the grant
program requirements and the proposals to confirm the matching resources proposed.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This work effort is consistent with the City Council’s direction in the April 2006 Colleagues’
Memo and the City’s Sustainability Policy. Additionally, this work effort is consistent with the
Council’s Top 4 priorities of Environmental Protection and Economic Health.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
These grants do not meet the definition of projects requiring environmental review under
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 21065.
Attachment A: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Funding From the
Urban Forestry Grant Program Entitled “An Urban Forest for Every City,”
as Provided Through Propositions 40 and 84, for an Urban Forestry
Management Plan Grant
Attachment B: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Funding From the
Urban Forestry Grant Program Entitled “An Urban Forest for Every City,”
as Provided Through Propositions 40 and 84, for an Urban Forestry
Inventory Grant
PREPARED BY: ___________________________________
Kelly Morariu
Assistant to the City Manager
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
CMR: 107:08 Page 1 of 4
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 107:08
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE EXPENDITURE OF $290,000 IN CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUNDS THROUGH A CONTRACT WITH
THE PALO ALTO ART CENTER FOUNDATION TO DEVELOP AND
COMPLETE THE PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASE FOR THE
RENOVATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PALO ALTO
ART CENTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PF-07000 (ART
CENTER ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL UPGRADES)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached agreement between the City of Palo Alto
and the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation expending $290,000 from CIP Project PF-0-7000 to
develop and complete the planning, design development phase for the proposed renovation and
capital improvements to the Palo Alto Art Center.
BACKGROUND
The 28,000 square foot Art Center building and its facility systems exist essentially as they were
built and installed in 1951. Since its conversion from a City Hall more than thirty-seven years
ago, the only significant repairs to the Art Center have been seismic improvements made in
1987. In early 1999, the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation (Foundation) began to work
proactively toward the needed expansion and renovation of the Art Center facility, focusing on
two identified issues: 1) mechanical and electrical upgrades to the exhibition spaces that had
already been identified in the City’s Infrastructure Management Plan; and 2) the need for
additional children’s art classrooms and activity space. In March 1999, the Palo Alto City
Council approved a proposal from the Foundation to explore the development of a public/private
partnership that would make possible a capital project to expand and renovate the Art Center.
In March 2000, the Foundation received a $50,000 grant from the David and Lucile Packard
Foundation to conduct a facility master planning process, matched by $50,000 from the City.
The Palo Alto Art Center Programming Report, completed in 2001 (CMR 438:01), laid out an
improvement plan that addressed the Center’s immediate needs.
In August 2001, a Joint Site Planning Committee was convened with the goal of seeking a site
design that would allow the Main Library and the Art Center to expand while addressing the
limitations and opportunities offered by the site, neighborhood concerns, and the desires of the
CMR: 107:08 Page 2 of 4
community and other stakeholders. In September 2001, the Foundation received a second
$50,000 grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. This grant was also matched by
the City (CMR: 226:02). The Site Planning Study for the Palo Alto Library and Art Center was
completed in February 2002. A draft EIR for the project was completed for the City on April 17,
2002.
The master plan and conceptual design for the Palo Alto Art Center and site was approved by
Council on July 14, 2002, along with a Memorandum of Understanding (CMR: 340:02)
describing the City’s commitment to contribute $5 million to a fund set up through a
public/private partnership over five years. The MOU was intended to go into effect upon
successful passage of a library bond measure in November 2002. That bond measure was
unsuccessful.
In 2005, the Foundation again contracted with Mark Cavagnero Associates to develop a phased
approach to complete the master plan. A first phase of building renovations with cost estimates
included creation of a children’s wing, improvements to the existing gallery space, and
replacement of mechanical and electrical systems, which the City has already identified for
renovation. Based on the preliminary cost estimates, the Infrastructure Management Plan capital
funding allocation for the Art Center Electrical & Mechanical Upgrade (Capital Implement
Program Project – PF-07000) was readjusted from $800,000 to $1.74 million.
In June 2006, the Foundation contracted with Netzel Associates to conduct a capital development
feasibility study within the community, and in December 2006, based on the contractor’s
recommendation from the study, the Foundation approved a $6.5 million project, the first phase
of the master plan.
On April 10, 2006, a colleague’s memo was approved by the City Council directing staff to work
with the Foundation in drafting a Memorandum of Understanding to expand and renovate the Art
Center as a public/private partnership.
On July 9, 2007, the Council approved a Letter of Intent (Attachment B) outlining mutually
acceptable terms and conditions for the collaboration between the City and the Foundation for
Phase I (building electrical, mechanical and children’s wing renovation) construction of
improvements and alterations to the Palo Alto Art Center (CMR 288:07).
On September 24, 2007, the Foundation entered into an agreement with Mark Cavagnero
Associates, to: 1) design the project through schematic design and design development phase; 2)
submit preliminary estimates of construction costs based on schematic design and adjustments to
preliminary estimate of construction costs based on the design development; 3) prepare
construction documents setting forth in detail the requirements for the construction of the project,
based on the design reviewed and approved by the Foundation and City; and 4) assist in the
awarding and preparing contracts for construction and administration of the construction
contract.
DISCUSSION
The Phase I project improvements and alterations to the Palo Alto Art Center consist of the full
renovation of approximately 7,600 square feet of existing area (creating a new children’s wing),
CMR: 107:08 Page 3 of 4
partial renovation of 12,000 square feet of existing area (mechanical and electrical, existing
gallery, and bathrooms). Additional improvements include enclosing and landscaping the central
garden, children’s sculpture garden, and children’s entry court; covering a portion of the
children’s sculpture garden; and adding a new parking/drop off area at the west end of the site.
The estimated cost of the proposed project is $6,500,000, of which $5,710,000, which includes
construction, furnishings and equipment, design, engineering and fees and an additional
$790,000 in fund development costs (pledge financing, annual support replacement, etc., to be
paid by the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation in support of the fundraising efforts).
The terms of the attached agreement with the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation for the transfer of
$290,000 to develop and complete the planning and design development phase for the capital
improvements and renovation to the Palo Alto Art Center are consistent with the Council-
approved Letter of Intent. The agreement transfers to the Foundation $290,000 to provide for
the City’s share of planning and design of the plans, specifications and working drawings for the
project. Should the project not proceed after the design phase is complete, the City can use the
plans to perform needed infrastructure repairs as specified in the Adamson study.
The City’s financial responsibility, as specified in Capital Improvement Project PF-07000 (Art
Center Electrical and Mechanical Upgrades) is to replace original mechanical and electrical
equipment and systems to meet current occupant need, provide code compliance, and optimize
operation and energy efficiency.
Although the ultimate goal is to reach an agreement under which the renovation work for the
Project shall be completed, this Agreement pertains only to the design development phase of the
Project. The planning and design development phase, of the project will require evaluation of
various issues, including compliance with LEED, ADA, seismic upgrades, hazardous materials
removal and electrical service upgrades. The costs of addressing these issues cannot be
accurately determined until the design development process has proceeded further. If the City
and Foundation reach agreement on the costs identified for each and mutually acceptable terms
and conditions for the continuation of the Project through the construction phase, then they will
negotiate and execute a separate written agreement and return to Council for approval.
TIMELINE
The agreement will begin upon the execution by the City. The Foundation’s estimated timeline
for the project is to have design development and City review completed by June 2008;
Foundation campaign planning and fundraising to be completed by December 2008; construction
documentation, permit approval and bidding to be completed by February 2009; and construction
to begin spring of 2009, with a ten-month anticipated construction period.
RESOURCE IMPACT
The Letter of Intent noted that the City had earmarked funding in the amount of $1.74 million as
part of its Infrastructure Management Plan for the Art Center, to be applied to the costs of the
project. This funding is shown in the adopted budget as Capital Improvement Program Project
(CIP)-PF-07000 (Art Center Electrical and Mechanical Upgrades). When design development is
completed, all requirements will have been identified, including LEED, seismic upgrade, ADA,
hazardous material removal and electrical service upgrade. Based on the cost estimates by Mack
CMR: 107:08 Page 4 of 4
5 (cost estimator for the project), it is possible that the City’s and Foundation’s share will need to
increase.
The adopted budget for Capital Improvement Project PF-07000 (Art Center Electrical and
Mechanical Upgrades) which covers for the design fee is $290,000. The 2008-09 Proposed
Budget includes $1,450,000 for the construction costs.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed project is consistent with the City’s recently updated Policy and Procedures 1-25,
Public/Private Partnerships, which defines this project as an alliance partnership.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Foundation will be required to fully comply with all provisions of CEQA as may apply to
the specific development plans submitted during the term of the Agreement.
PREPARED BY:_____________________________________________________________
LINDA CRAIGHEAD
Division Manager, Arts & Sciences
APPROVED BY:_____________________________________________________________
RICHARD JAMES
Community Services Director
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: _________________________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Agreement with the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation
Attachment B: Letter of Intent
Attachment C: CIP Project PF-07000 (CIP Page)
Attachment D: Proposed Project Timeline
cc: Palo Alto Art Center Foundation
CMR: 161:08 Page 1 of 3
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 161:08
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 18.14 (“BELOW
MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM”) TO TITLE 18 (“ZONING”) OF THE PALO
ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance to incorporate the existing
Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, policies and procedures as stated in Program H-36 of the
Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan into a new Chapter 18.14 (“Below Market Rate
Housing Program”) of the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code).
BACKGROUND
Council first adopted a BMR inclusionary housing policy in 1974 as part of the Housing Element of
the Comprehensive Plan. Palo Alto’s program has been successful by adding 179 owner units and
155 rental units to the inventory. In addition, there are another 145 new owner and rental units to be
added to the Program that have recently sold, are under construction or have requisite planning
approvals. Since its inception, the BMR program has been governed by a short, two-page
description in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Attachment B is the text of the
current Program H-36 which was adopted in 2002 with the last Housing Element revision.)
DISCUSSION
Increasingly, it has become the norm for communities to adopt an ordinance to govern their
inclusionary housing programs. While the BMR program is still operating effectively, the need for
codifying the program within the Zoning Ordinance has become more important as the program
grows in size and matures. By adopting this ordinance, the City will assist housing developers and
other interested parties in determining the City’s affordable housing requirements as they apply to
residential development. The legal basis of the program will be more clearly defined with the
adoption of the statements of findings and purposes contained in the proposed ordinance, which will
also improve developer understanding of the program and assist in enforcement.
Section 18.14.030 of the draft ordinance provides a very brief overview of the BMR requirements
excerpted from Program H-36. The Housing Element Program H-36 text is not being revised or
amended by adoption of this ordinance. A developer seeking to determine how the BMR
requirements apply to a proposed housing project will still need to consult Program H-36 and other
CMR: 161:08 Page 2 of 3
policy memoranda (these are available on the City’s web site or from staff). Developers will need to
continue to discuss their projects with Planning staff in order to obtain a complete understanding of
the application of the program to their particular project.
Another important function of the ordinance is to clarify that Council has delegated to the City
Manager the authority and responsibility for the preparation, approval and revision, from time to
time, of administrative policies, rules and procedures for the administration and operations of the
program by both City staff and contract administrators, including the work carried out by the PAHC
Housing Services, LLC (PAHC). The BMR policy and procedures manual covers both tasks
administered by City staff, such as negotiations with developers; and aspects of the program
managed by PAHC, such as the waiting list, the sales of new and existing units, transfers of title,
refinancing, temporary rental and similar matters.
Relationship to BMR Update Study: Recommendations related to the BMR Update Study from the
Policy and Services Committee (September 11, 2007) and the Planning and Transportation
Commission (October 10, 2007), together with further staff analysis of key policy issues, is
tentatively scheduled for Council review on April 7, 2008. Once Council has provided policy
direction on changes to the BMR program, implementing amendments and revisions to the Housing
Element Program H-36 text and to the Chapter 18.14 ordinance will need to be prepared for
adoption. Ultimately, the Housing Element program will become a statement of broader program
purposes and objectives with the ordinance containing specific developer requirements and
affordability standards for owner and rental units.
RESOURCE IMPACT
There are no resource impacts related to the adoption of this ordinance. Funds are available within
the Residential Housing Fund for the cost of contract legal services which will be necessary to assist
staff with the drafting of a comprehensive BMR ordinance and with the preparation of new BMR
ownership deed restrictions and related enforcement documents.
TIMELINE
The adoption of the attached ordinance is just one task that is part of a multi-year work program to
update the City’s thirty-four year old BMR program. Recent and planned public meetings and
milestones in this work program are listed below:
• June 2003: Council approved consultant contract with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. and
Anderson and Associates and funding for contract staff for the update work
• March 2007: Completion of consultant report by September 11, 2007: Policy and Services
Committee reviewed policy recommendations resulting from the BMR study
• October 10, 2007: PTC reviewed policy recommendations from the BMR study
• March 10, 2008: City Council reviews interim BMR ordinance to codify existing program
policies and procedures
• April 7, 2008: City Council reviews policy recommendations for revisions to the BMR program
resulting from the BMR study and provides direction to staff
• April – July 2008: Staff drafts amendments to the BMR ordinance and additional revisions to
the Program H-36 text
• July 2008: City Council adopts amendments to the BMR Ordinance and related Housing
CMR: 161:08 Page 3 of 3
Element Program H-36 amendments
• December 2008: City Attorney completes new legal documents (deed restrictions, deed of trust)
and revisions are completed by Planning & PAHC to the Policy and Procedures Manual
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The attached draft ordinance does not amend the adopted BMR program of the Housing Element of
the Comprehensive Plan and does not propose new BMR program requirements or any new policies.
The purpose of the ordinance is only to codify the current BMR program as stated in Program H-36
of the Housing Element as adopted by Council on December 2, 2002.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Adoption of this ordinance implements Program H-37 of the Housing Element which states: “Adopt
an ordinance codifying and implementing the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Program.” The
draft ordinance codifies existing policies and program rules and is consistent with the policies and
programs of the Comprehensive Plan and with the Comprehensive Plan EIR.
PREPARED BY: ___________________________________
Catherine Siegel
Housing Coordinator / Advance Planning Manager
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: ________________________________________
STEVE EMSLIE
Director of Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ________________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Ordinance Adding Chapter 18.14 (“Below Market Rate Housing Program”) to Title 18
(“Zoning”) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code
B. Program H-36 (BMR Program) of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Adopted on
December 2, 2002).
CC: Palo Alto Housing Corporation, Marlene Prendergast, Executive Director
Silicon Valley Association of Realtors 19400 Stevens Creek Blvd. #100, Cupertino, CA 95014
Home Builders Association of Northern California, Southern Division Attn: Beverly Bryant 675 North First Street, Suite 620, San Jose, CA 95112-5118
CMR: 156:08 Page 1 of 5
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE: MARCH 10, 2008 CMR: 156:08
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SITE AND
DESIGN AND RECORD OF LAND USE ACTION TO ALLOW (1)
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES
TO TWO OPEN SPACE (OS) DISTRICT HOMES AT 3220 AND 3230
ALEXIS DRIVE, (2) SCREENING VEGETATION ON ADJACENT
FOOTHILLS PARK LAND, AND (3) EXPANSION OF THE PROJECT
SITE TO INCLUDE AN ADJACENT, VACANT OS PARCEL AT 3208
ALEXIS DRIVE TO BE GRADED, LANDSCAPED AND USED FOR
DRIVEWAY ACCESS, A SPA AND A PERIMETER PATHWAY.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff, the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the Architectural Review Board
recommend that the City Council approve the following:
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum, prepared for properties located at 3208,
3220, and 3230 Alexis Drive, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(Attachment E).
2. A Record of Land Use Action approving a Site and Design Review application to allow
architectural and site plan revisions to the previously approved project, including screening
vegetation on Foothills Park land and the addition of a driveway, spa and screening
landscaping on the adjoining vacant parcel in the Open Space district, subject to the findings
and conditions of approval contained the Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A).
DISCUSSION
The Site and Design Review application for the construction of the two homes that currently
exist at 3220 and 3230 Alexis Drive was originally approved in May 2000 by the City Council
after Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) and Architectural Review Board
(ARB) reviews. Attachment C includes additional background information on the original
application. A full project description of the subject application is included in the attached
Planning and Transportation Commission staff report (Attachment D). In this project, the
CMR: 156:08 Page 2 of 5
applicant is requesting landscaping, grading and architectural changes from the original approval
with a negligible change to impervious coverage.
Landscaping and Grading Changes
The changes include the modification of the existing driveway into a new circular driveway to
accommodate parking at the front of the property; grading for a gravel trail along the perimeter
of the site; terracing between the main residence and the guest house; grading of the southern
portion of the site to accommodate a new infinity style swimming pool and to create a more
useable rear yard; and installation of perimeter fencing, landscape lighting, and additional
vegetation. No lighting is proposed for the trail along the perimeter of the site. A seven-foot
iron fence is proposed to encircle the site for security. A six-foot iron fence with two gates is
proposed for the driveway area and will be located sixteen feet behind the front property line.
The new fence and gates will be obscured with plantings at the base. Over 363 new trees would
be planted on and off site. These trees would include various large specimen native trees, such
as Coast Live Oak, Coast Redwood and Valley Oak trees, to provide additional screening along
the perimeter of the site. Since the project includes the removal of some of the smaller trees and
may include the relocation of several trees on site, the applicant will work with the Planning
Arborist to identify locations for replanting.
Building Changes
The project includes minor changes to the existing main house, including: changes to materials; a
reduction in the amount of glazing; a minor addition of 36-sq. ft.; and the conversion of the
lanais to more enclosed loggias. Changes to the windows include the addition of divided lights,
arch shapes and exterior shutters. The loggias will feature stone columns, walls and arches,
creating more private outdoor areas. The original building materials included natural stone walls
with slate roofs in earth-tone colors, natural wood doors, windows, columns and trellises and
bronze anodized skylights. New materials will consist of imported earth-toned antique clay roof
tiles, wood trellises, natural wood doors and windows with non-reflective glass, and natural stone
materials for columns and the base. The loggias will incorporate the greater use of stone to
frame the outdoor areas. The eave overhangs throughout the building would be reduced by 15
inches and entirely removed from the gabled features. A detailed description of the changes by
elevations is provided in Attachment D.
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This project was reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) on
January 9, 2008 and January 30, 2008. On January 30, the Commission recommended that the
City Council approve the Negative Declaration and the Site and Design Review application. The
Site and Design findings, the visibility of the site from Vista Point, and landscape screening were
discussed. It was acknowledged that the landscaping would never completely screen the
buildings, but is likely to soften the appearance. The Commission discussed planting trees on the
adjacent Foothills Park property, impact on wildlife, location and appearance of the perimeter
fence, maintenance of the off-site and on-site landscaping and fence and fire safety. The
Planning Arborist, Dave Dockter, confirmed that staff is satisfied with the applicant’s progress in
revising the landscaping plan. The Foothills Park supervisor, Lester Hodgins, confirmed that the
City’s Parks and Recreation Department was supportive of the proposed tree planting on
Foothills Park lands. The Commission voted in favor of the proposed project with the following
changes, which are reflected in the revised Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A):
CMR: 156:08 Page 3 of 5
Addition to findings:
• Reflect that this is a unique property, and location, and the planting on Foothills Park
lands provide a significant benefit to the City that does not set any precedent given the
benefits and unique site issues.
Changes to conditions of approval:
• Supported staff recommendation to change condition of approval number 9, so that prior
to any future sale of the third lot, the property owner shall remove the spa located in that
lot and either record an easement to allow a portion of driveway to remain on the third lot
or remove the portion of the driveway from the third lot.
• Supported staff recommendation to change to condition of approval number 14,
increasing the duration that the tree relocation security deposit be held to five years, so
that it is consistent with condition number 16.
• Require perpetual maintenance and replacement of the landscaping on the property.
• Require vines be planted on the rear elevation.
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the project on February 7, 2008. The ARB
unanimously recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
approve the Site and Design Review application. The ARB discussed the view from Vista Point
in Foothills Park, landscaping, plantings in Foothills Park, building design, color and materials,
and screening vegetation on the house. The members of the ARB indicated that the proposal
would be an improvement to the existing condition and the plans reflected improvements over
those reviewed at the ARB preliminary review. The ARB voted in favor of the project with the
following additions to the conditions of approval, which are reflected in the revised Record of
Land Use Action:
• Vines shall be planted in irrigated planters to be placed adjacent to the south elevation
walls above the green roof, and the vines shall be allowed to grow along the second floor
of the south elevation.
• References to “ivy” in plans shall be replaced with “vines” on all project drawings and
the permit.
• References to the Universal Building Codes should be replaced with the current approved
Building Code for the State of California.
Additionally, two items will be required to return to an ARB subcommittee subsequent to any
building permit approvals. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the subcommittee shall
review the following:
• The shape of the arched window on the south elevation to determine if it should be
modified.
• The potential use of a darker stucco color.
Several members of the public spoke regarding the project at the public hearings. One member
of the public spoke at both the Commission and ARB hearings expressing concerns regarding the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the adequacy of the landscape screening. Two members of
the Palo Alto Foothills Neighborhood Association spoke in favor of the proposal. A petition
signed by Palo Alto Foothills Neighborhood Association in favor of the project was submitted
(Attachment H).
CMR: 156:08 Page 4 of 5
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Under the current regulations in Chapter 18.76.020 of the Municipal Code, applications for two
or fewer single family residences do not require architectural review by the ARB. However, this
application was brought before the ARB for review for two reasons. The first reason is because
the original project was reviewed by the ARB for the two existing residences when ARB review
was required by the Municipal Code. The second reason is because the project involves a third
parcel, where a third single family residence would be allowed (although was not proposed in
this project). The Commission and ARB found that the changes are consistent with the Open
Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Draft Initial Study, which reviewed the environmental issues as required by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were
posted and circulated for public review. The 20-day public review circulation period began
January 11 and ended January 31, 2008. A copy of the environmental document is provided as
Attachment E. Key mitigation measures include the requirement of a Tree Relocation and
Maintenance Plan, a Tree Security Deposit, and a Tree Preservation Report. The Draft Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration must be adopted prior to the Council decision on this
project application.
PREPARED BY: _____________________________________________
ELENA LEE
Senior Planner
DEPARTMENT HEAD: ________________________________________
STEVE EMSLIE
Director of Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ____________________________________________
EMILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action.
Attachment B: Location Map
Attachment C: Background
Attachment D: January 30, 2008 PTC/ARB staff report w/o attachments
Attachment E: Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Attachment F: Planning & Transportation Commission Minutes of January 30, 2008.
Attachment G: Applicant’s Submittals
Attachment H: Correspondences from the public
Attachment I: Project Plans (Council packet only)
CMR: 156:08 Page 5 of 5
COURTESY COPIES
Open Space LLC/Park Arastradero LLC
Ken Alsman, Scott Design Associates
Lester Hodges, Foothills Park/Community Services Dept.
Brian Schmit, Committee for Green Foothills